 |
|
Justice Minister Cho Kuk pledges allegiance to the South Korean flag during his appointment ceremony at the Ministry of Justice in Gwacheon, Gyeonggi Province, on Sept. 9. (Park Jong-shik, staff photographer)
|
Despite his intentions, the new justice minister faces certain restrictions in achieving his mission
Even as his family members are facing a massive investigation by South Korea’s public prosecutors, Justice Minister Cho Kuk was newly appointed yesterday and chosen to lead the drive for prosecutorial reform. But considering that Cho is the first justice minister to assume the post in the shadow of an investigation, it’s unclear how effectively he’ll lead that reform. Furthermore, the fact is that the justice minister has few means at his disposal to carry out those reforms. Another question is how Cho means to navigate the considerable challenges he’s likely to face: not only the outcome of the prosecutors’ investigation but also the motion of dismissal, special prosecutors, and the parliamentary probe being threatened by opposition parties. Cho underlines commitment to prosecutorial reform during appointment ceremony During the ceremony confirming his appointment as justice minister, which was held at the Ministry of Justice in Gwacheon at 4:30 pm on Monday, Cho voiced his firm resolution to reform the prosecutor’s office. “My appointment as minister of justice signifies that it’s my duty to bring to fruition the long-pending reform of judicial affairs and the public prosecutors. This reform is the dream I’ve held throughout my entire career as a scholar and intellectual; it’s the task to which I diligently applied myself during my tenure as presidential senior secretary for civil affairs; and it’s the mission of our time,” Cho said in his message at the ceremony. “After democratization, control mechanisms were created for the governmental bodies that had once possessed great power, so as to disperse that power, but the prosecutors alone remain in possession of great authority that isn’t moderated by any such control mechanisms. Any governmental body that possesses excessive authority without any constraints inevitably threatens civil rights and freedoms,” Cho emphasized. “It’s enough for the prosecutors to carry out their investigations, and for the Justice Ministry to do its work. We need to introduce changes in the composition of personnel at the Justice Ministry and the prosecutors and to ensure that the Justice Ministry is capable of carrying out meaningful oversight of the prosecutors. That could involve securing the authority to make appropriate personnel decisions at the prosecutors, passing prosecutorial reform bills, and managing investigations to ensure that the public’s rights are protected.” Cho’s hands are tied, with few effective means at his disposal The problem is that there are clear limitations on the prosecutorial reform that can be achieved by the justice minister. Key components of the reform drive — namely, dividing investigative authority between the prosecutors and police and establishing an office to investigate crimes by high-ranking officials — depend on the National Assembly. While Cho said he would “proactively support the passage of related bills by the 20th National Assembly,” realistically speaking, there’s little Cho can do to move those bills forward when the political opposition is dead set on stopping him. In addition to revising the law, Cho is also likely to take steps to downsize the prosecutors’ special investigation division, which carries out its own investigations, and to reinforce the distinction between the Justice Ministry and the prosecutors, but such efforts aren’t likely to be easy, either. Any attempt to downsize the special investigation division while its prosecutors are investigating Cho’s family would surely provoke an outcry. “There’s talk about a personnel reshuffle that would reduce positions in the special investigation division, the very same division that’s been investigating him and his family. It won’t be easy to downsize that division, since critics would call it a retaliatory measure,” said an attorney who formerly served as a high-ranking prosecutor. Furthermore, any such effort could be criticized as contradicting Cho’s earlier actions. While serving as senior secretary for civil affairs, Cho spearheaded a government reform plan that further bolstered the power of the prosecutor’s special investigation division, and in a recent round of promotions there, all the critical spots were filled with prosecutors from that division. And since the regular round of reassignments already took place recently, it would be awkward for Cho to step in and move around staff once again. That said, Cho could achieve some degree of success in justice ministry affairs unrelated to the prosecutors, including policies regarding crime prevention, human rights, corrections, immigration, and resident aliens. Unlike the prosecutors, there’s no organized opposition to reforms in these areas; furthermore, Cho, during his time as a professor, apparently took an active interest in researching non-prosecutorial judicial affairs. Meanwhile, the scope of interaction between justice ministry officials and the prosecutors — already limited to one bureau at the ministry and an office at the prosecutors — is likely to be further degraded. A tough investigation and staunch political opposition among many obstacles facing Cho The bigger problem is that there’s no telling what conclusion the prosecutors will reach in their investigation of Cho’s family members. There’s no way for the prosecutors to back down now that they’ve carried out a shocking spate of raids and indicted Cho’s wife on the evening of his hearing. The prosecutors will have to focus on getting some kind of definite results, and Cho will have to stand by and watch. During his hearing, Cho promised he wouldn’t receive any briefings or give any instructions related to the investigation of his family. Another challenge without any easy resolution is the fierce pushback from the opposition party, which is even talking about the “fall of the administration.” With parliamentary elections coming up in April 2020, the Liberty Korea Party (LKP) and other conservative parties are likely to stay on the warpath. LKP head Hwang Kyo-ahn argued on Monday that “a special prosecutor or a parliamentary probe would be sure to reveal illegality.” Lawmakers from the Bareunmirae Party also released a joint statement in which they promised to work with other politicians and parties opposed to Cho’s appointment on a push to have the National Assembly pass a motion calling for Cho’s dismissal. By Shin Ji-min and Lim Jae-woo, staff reporters Please direct comments or questions to [english@hani.co.kr]
